Do you agree with Trump that social media should the free exchange of ideas?

Here is the executive order. Do you agree or disagree with the basic idea that Twitter/Facebook/Instagram, etc should allow people to express their ideas without fear that it will be removed if they dare to think differently than the people running large corporations?

The other main idea is that if these companies are removing posts because they express ideas they don't like they're acting like an editorial board and picking and choosing which ideas come through and are no longer a neutral platform that allows the free exchange of ideas.

Do you like having a big corporation tell you what you're allowed to express or do you think you should be able to express ideas even if the people that run the corporation don't like them?

https://www.scribd.com/document/463461528/Executive-Order-Preventing-Online-Censorship#fullscreen&from_embed

Trump's bullshit EO has no teeth. It won't get far according to legal experts. It's a bullshit EO that plays into a bullshit conspiracy theory because he got fact-checked for partially breaking their TOS. You aren't supposed to spread dis-information about elections. Which he did.

The myth of social media anti-conservative bias refuses to die

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/platform-bias.php

If your ideas involve hate speech and dangerous conspiracy theories, than you're going to get shit on. And the company has 100% the right to shit on those ideas. Don't like it? Leave it. Welcome to capitalism.

They can remove the post if it goes against their TOS. Like hate-speech and covid-19 mis-information that could be hazardous. They can flag it with a fact check it goes against their TOS. Like election dis-information.

You cant just go around spamming the N word or telling people incorrect information about an upcomming election. There has to be SOME moderation.

Twitter is doing fine, if anything they are giving POTUS special privileges. They woulda' banned people for some of that crazy bullshit.

As long as Facebook/Twitter/etc are not the government, they can do whatever they want, as doing otherwise would violate the 1st amendment.

HOWEVER, they should also be held responsible for illegal stuff that happens in their platforms, whether it is allowing a safe space for terrorism (like white supremacy or ISIS), abuse (self-explanatory), and other stuff like that.

For example, a government shouldn't be able to tell Facebook to take something down, but if someone with influence is calling for someone to be killed, then that account should be removed; otherwise Facebook is equally responsible for any deaths that came from it.

Congress and Senate told Twitter to deal with election interference and dis-information better.

They started doing that more, and then Trump did this.

I think politicians should be fact checked and that pathological liars like Trump should be outed for what they are. By virtue of running for public office you cede certain things....like pretending you can spew any form of bullshit and lies across any media platform and expect not to be held to account.

IMO any other position regarding politicians is pure garbage since it would be antithetical to the purpose of representative democracy.

Yeah, but Twitter didn't really do much at all. They should have banned the guy for breaking his TOS multiple times, but they refused to do it. They cuddled to him, and when they dared to do even less than the bare minimum of pointing out incorrect rhetoric, he turns on them, because he expects absolute loyalty. It's Twitter's own fault for letting the problem get this bad. If they had banned him the minute he broke the TOS like any other Twitter user, this wouldn't be as big an issue.

I really hope Twitter and Facebook bans the man-child, Trumpy, so he can take his base to the Chinese platform that is Tik Tok.

sooo let me understand this.

1) the president of the united states says something stupid and misleading on twitter ( again )

2) twitter, in order to do its part to protect our election process ( something the fucking PRESIDENT should actually be doing ), calls him out on his bullshit

3) president has a tantrum and tries to issue an EO to go after said platforms because he's a thin skinned pussy who can't take being challenged.

this is just like him sucking down hydroxycholoquine like they're tic-tacs rather than just admitting he was wrong about it being a covid-19 wonder drug...

jesus, this snowflake idiot. just take the L and move on....

meanwhile, how many americans died today?

If trump's executive order goes through...….it won't......but he would be banned. Which would be amusing.

Or, you know, Twitter relocates to Vancouver, tells Trump to suck their collective cock.

So is your attempt to frame this issue as some sort of free speech issue (as opposed to you know, lying and violating a platform's terms of service):

a. kinda disingenuous?

b. really disingenuous?

c. way out in the next football field disingenuous?

Not only should his account be deleted and he should be banned from the platform, but so should everyone in his administration.

you should probably check out what you agreed to by signing up and posting here...

Also, if Twitter was to lose its Section 230 protections and thus be liable for what is published on their platform, wouldn't they just become more strict on what content is allowed?

Trump has been peddling his alternative facts and conspiracy nonsense on Twitter for YEARS, long before he was in office. If anything, Twitter has been far more accommodating to him than he deserves.

I, for one, don't believe he has any right to use a private platform to spread lies and promote disinformation to aid his re-election unchallenged. Twitter should do everything that it can to combat his lies in this instance, and I 100% approve of their move. Trump doesn't like it? Then he can shit his diaper and sit in it.

Then they can ban him.....lol.

Yes and no.

Free speech is good and all, but companies have a right to moderate what goes on their platform. If you are so opposed to this, why don't you form your own platform to hopefully outcompete YouTube, Twitter and anything else.

Welcome to Capitalism.

I used to be against actions like this, but lately the misinformation being spread online has been causing ACTUAL damage to society. Just look at all the 5G related vandalism. Or the anti-science hysteria (attacking among other things GMOs, Vaccines, Nuclear Power, Evolution, Climate Change). Or conspiracy fearmongering.

But the good ideas will win out in the end? But do they? People are incredibly stupid and the world is filled with Raidens who will believe what they want to believe in, regardless of evidence presented. Trying to turn Truth into a democracy, has had catastrophic consequences.

People should be allowed to say what they want, but they should also be held accountable for what they say.

Edit: Typical Trump. Didnt he want to open up the Libel Laws? But now that moderation is impacting HIM he suddenly wants to back down on them. Trump is nothing but a coward. A thin skinned professional victim.

Social media companies are responsible for the content on their platform. They have a right to remove or flag whatever they want. If Trump wants to spew nonsense, he can go have another rally. The internet doesn't need another 8chan.

Lies are not ideas, Trump.

If it goes through and Twitter suddenly becomes liable for what nonsense Trump tweets, I can picture the tantrum he's gonna pull when they block his user for violating their TOS.

No, I'd rather not have my twitter or FB feed filled with gore, neonazis and kiddie porn. 8chan was proof that "completely unregulated social media' is an atrocious idea.

History continues to prove that this is false idealism, and yet we keep having to relearn the lesson. Bad ideas take root and persist, sometimes in a benign minority but always retaining the potential to rise up in a larger or more powerful group and cause a lot of damage.

Sheesh, as if he doesn't have enough places to peddle his free speech allready. This is rediculous, the media covers him and his speech more than anyone in history perhaps. What kind of nonsense is this? Now he expects everybody to like it and not even fact check him?

Actually yes, this would have the opposite effect that Trump wants.

And as far as free speech goes, you can say what you want, but that doesn't grant you the access to any specific platform.

Even Public Universities and parks require permits to speak. Trump is free to use other platforms or create his own. Anyone does.

Did you even read the executive order yourself or listen to what Trump said? You like having a big faceless corporation decide what speech is allowed and what isn't?

Seems like you read a headline and then regurgitate it without understand what you're saying. Have you seen the examples of conservatives being banned for daring to express thoughts and ideas that the liberals in the corporation don't like?

What world renowned scientist work at Twitter, Facebook, and other social media companies that makes them scientific experts? If you said that you thought the death count would be far below the official projections would your post be removed since it went against the official numbers?

The CDC is going against the WHO recommendations on masks. Should the CDC have their account banned?

What in the world is hate speech? Is insulting the POTUS based on this skin color hate speech? They guy working at Twitter did that. People on this forum do it all the time.

Will CNN and the other fake news be fact checked for their deceptively edited videos about the innocent high school student where they had to settle? Will they fact check all the Obama lackeys who lied on Twitter saying they had evidence of some delusional conspiracy theory that Trump was working with the Russians while under oath they said they had no evidence?

Would saying that people from the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign be removed as a conspiracy theory? I remember people posting that all the time until it turned out to be true.

What is misinformation about the coming election? Would you be in favor of Twitter banning anyone who says that republicans want voter suppression or that minorities can't figure out how to produce a voter ID?

You want people working at these companies to decide what is and isn't allowed? Wouldn't that make them like the editorial page of a newspaper and not a public forum with the free exchange of ideas? What makes them the experts on truth?

The EO puts more liability on the platforms.

What do you think is going to happen if something like twitter loses its Section 230 protections?

Yes, I really do think so.

They are not exactly a private company if they do business with the government already. The censorship of ideas on the internet have been completely arbitrary based on the weather that day and the person behind the moderation. I think the internet should go back to what it was in the year 2000.

"You seem new here. Block, ignore, stop crying, or GTFO"

The only thing that should be moderated are flame posts, a call for violence, spam, and illegal content. Just like the 2000s. None of this wrongthink bullshit.

He was just fact checked. Not censored.

It's part of their rules to moderate election disinformation. They are allowed to enforce their policies. The POTUS shouldn't be breaking their rules.

This EO has no teeth and will have 0 results.

How is Trump being censored?

1. I did read it. And according to legal experts it's not going to do much.

2. Even if it did change things, it would just put more liability on the platform resulting in quicker bans/deletions than moderation. You don't seem to get how ANY of this works (as usual).

By the way, he was just fact checked. Not censored. It's part of their rules to fact check election disinformation.

I've seen them violating the TOS and being removed. Welcome to capitalism?

You didn't refute my article btw,

The myth of social media anti-conservative bias refuses to die

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/platform-bias.php

You can give it a try, it's okay to be wrong.

That's a spray on tan. Not his race.

Lies and slander should not be okay.

No, racist, defamatory, threatening, discriminatory nor legally misleading speech should not be given a platform.

Wah wah they modewated my content on a website I dont contwol wah wah im a baby pwesident wah wah!!

Twitter are going to ban trump. It's a private platform and he is a c£€t.

If the only reason you support doing something is because somebody dared to fact check you, then you don't really support what you say you support.

@foxhound_fox: In other words, you don’t support the first amendment.

There you have it folks.

Is he talking about congress?

also, some of the things he listed are not protected under the first amendment

Yes of course. Echo chambers are dangerous. They are the hearths of racism. The people in control are monsters. Their little China2.0 project must fall if people are to remain free and the elections fair.

That's the mistake. There is no way to compete. The difference between the number 1 platform and anything else is oceans wide. There is never going to be another number 1. There is no capitalism at play. You cannot make a better social media platform and compete. It's no longer a company's domain. They have made themselves into an extension of our voices (globally) so they must lose their right to moderate willy nilly.

With the echo chambers now, good ideas don't stand a chance. We have seen so much misinformation being enforced... The difference between 5G vandalism and the misinformation on Twitter & co. is that there are people who can tell you that attacking 5G transmitters is real silly. And why it's silly. Without that, wouldn't it be worse?

If you think people should be allowed to say what they want, that's exactly why this must happen. They can still be held responsible, but silencing them is not the solution to a discussion.

That is not what Trump wants. He wants a right wing dictatorship that lets him lie all he wants and put out his approved message.

^^^

I’ve often humored what kind of leader Trump would be if he were given ultimate, unrestricted power. It’s surprising to me that many, if not most, of his followers believe he’d be fairly benign. There’s no doubt in my mind that a free press would cease to exist under a Trump dictatorship. I think that would be an immediate given.

The first amendment does not give you the right to spew what ever you want where you want. It protects you from the government silencing you. Period. Nothing to do with private enterprises. Why is it so hard to understand the Constitution and Amendments? Is it like Science?

Social Media companies like twitter need to decide if they want to be a publisher or an open forum.

They can still censor anything illegal posted as an open forum. But if they want to be a publisher and be able to censor and pull content as they wish whether its illegal or not, they need to be classified as a publisher.

They dont want to be a publisher though because then they are liable for anything that is posted on the site.

They want to have thier cake and eat it too

@jeezers: What was censored?

Found the bigot.

@mattbbpl: from 2018 https://thenextweb.com/tech/2019/12/05/twitter-to-follow-facebook-and-instagram-with-new-anti-nsfw-guidelines/

And it just keeps getting worse, they just keep expanding vague guidelines, they have already been caught shadowbanning people, granted this isnt always the company its self, sometimes its the person working for twitter shadowbanning things they disagree with. The more rules they make the more confusing it gets, not to mention they are so big now its hard to check that employees are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

Joe Rogan had jack Dorsey on purposely to talk about it and its was kind of a joke because jack went on with his lawyer lol

@mattbbpl: very entertaining and interesting talk

https://youtu.be/DZCBRHOg3PQ

Except as far as I can tell the Section 230 protections exist for the exact reason to allow them to moderate content.

@drlostrib: why do you want social media censoring thing that arent illegal?